Good to see that the British government is finally realising that renewable energy is “foolish” and that a fundamental change in course is necessary.

This is revealed by an undercover video rolled by Greenpeace, who of course are shocked that Britain would want to end its folly.

At the 4:19 mark Greenpeace has Peter Lilley saying:

Basically I think Osbourne wanted to get people into key positions who could begin to get the government off the hook of the commitments it made very foolishly. […] We could well see, certainly amendments to the Climate Change Act.”

High time!

That means Britain is 2 steps ahead of the US in ending its climate madness. Under Obama the US is now contemplating committing to green energy, which first has to be done before the country can next think about getting off the hook.

Our friend James Delingpole is featured in the video as an “extreme” element operating in a “militant” wing of the Conservative party.

The British government may indeed come to sanity when it realizes that public debt is fast becoming a big problem and that by cheapening energy (by any means) would be a boost to industry that doesn’t cost.
Any Western country that decides not to maintain all the strictures now applied to the production of energy will be the country that will easily balance its books as industries, manufacturing, and employment, and so tax returns grow. So maybe, just maybe, the UK is awakening from a long bad hysterical dream.

CO2 is not a problem and the CAGW theory is just that – an unproven theory.

Has the British government finally come to its senses and realized that the national debt is growing and the fantasy of cheap renewable energy is just that. Have they realized that if any Western country throws off the strictures restraining the use of all energy sources would release the industry, employment and tax revenues to grow, and the cost is minimal.

CO2 is not a problem, the CAGW theory is just a theory. It has not been proved.

In the USA there are National and State laws, regulations, subsidizes, gifts, and who knows what. It will not be easy to undo all of this. Further, many folks see no need to. With dozens of wind turbines on the horizon (about $3M each), an acquaintance explained to me that electricity from wind was free. I’d like some of that free electricity but it all goes out of our area, some even out of State (WA). Our hydropower rate is going up.

———-
tckev,

Regarding climate, there is a null hypothesis, namely, what has been witnessed and called climate change is within natural variability. This has not been disproven or falsified.
The language of science does not claim to prove a theory. Certain collections of scientific work have been (and are) quite useful, though unproven and even wrong in a strict sense. Think of classical mechanics and quantum mechanics as an example.

Still, if they keep tinkering with CAGW and changing definitions and goal posts, they might yet get something useful. More likely it will be abandoned as we know it and replaced by an unknown something.

“Regarding climate, there is a null hypothesis, namely, what has been witnessed and called climate change is within natural variability. This has not been disproven or falsified.”

I prefer to state it like this:
Observed variability is within the range expected by the null hypothesis of natual variability.
The CO2AGW hypothesis adds no explanatory value. Therefore, by Occam’s razor, we can and should drop it.
Oh, and the observed lack of warming contradicts the GCM scenarios. They need to be seriously re-fudged if anyone feels like he wants to pay for that (but should explain what he thinks he’ll get for his money, and why he lives under the impression that he’ll get it – experience shows that he likely won’t.)

Dear tckev, outside the domain of mathematics theories are never proved. However, CAGW is falsified on all levels. It is a dead theory and the Climate Change Act 2008 (shown four times in the movie) a monument of deception.

It was largely due to the efforts of Bryony Worthington (now Baroness Worthington). Despite her degree in English, she claims to be a “bit of a numbers geek”. She persuaded both Ed Milliband and David Cameron that there would be votes for their respective parties if they backed the Climate Change Act. Being responsible politicians, they both jumped at this opportunity.

I remember it slightly differently. Cameron went “green” in order to make the Conservative Party more “cool” and less “nasty” without making it a clone of Labour, and the Climate Change Act was Brown and Milliband’s way of not getting “out-greened” by Cameron. From a purely political point of view, it’s understandable why they did it – which does not excuse the lunacy and irresponsibility of it.

Britain will not suffer these political fools and Knaves for much longer – we are broke and going further under fast.

Britain’s national debt is approaching £1.7 trillion, if the whole debt is actually calculated [our treasury lies about figures!!] it is nearer to £3.5 trillion, if one adds private debt on – some 1.4 trillion and with yearly borrowing figures approx’ the £140 billion mark – it is clear that the British economy is drowning in debt.

Cheap and abundant energy – is just under our feet – shale gas, shale oil and 300 years of coal reserves. Simply put, Britain can neither afford nor ignore our energy costs any longer if we wish to avoid the financial and economic catastrophe of a nation like Argentina or Greece.